A new NBC reality show is proving to be as controversial as its British counterpart, with criticism from psychologists, child developmentalists, and related organizations pouring in long before the first episode aired two weeks ago.
The main premise of “The Baby Borrowers”, which airs Wednesdays at 8:00 PM, is simple: showing inexperienced teenagers the realities of raising children through, well, reality. NBC’s website for the “intriguing new social experiment” describes the process like this:
“The Baby Borrowers”…[is] based on the hit British program that asks five diverse teenage couples — ages 18-20 — to fast-track to adulthood by setting up a home, getting a job and becoming caring parents first to babies, toddlers, pre-teens and their pets, teenagers and senior citizens — all over the course of three weeks.
As the social experiment begins, the five young volunteer couples are asked to literally grow up overnight when they are each given a home in a quiet cul-de-sac outside Boise, Idaho and attend pre-natal classes as each “mother” wears a simulated “empathy” belly to prepare them for the arrival of their “baby.”
When a real baby (all aged six-11 months old) appears at their door — courtesy of five pairs of real volunteer parents (some of whom were teen parents themselves) who entrust their infants to one of the couples — the nervous, fumbling teens are in for three long, arduous days that make chilling out a distant memory. They must stick to rigid routines, handle the feeding chores, diaper duty and crying jags that might be shared by baby and teens — all the while under 24-hour supervision by nannies and the real parents who are stationed next door, watching via monitor, and able to step in at any time. Plus, one teen from each of the couples must start a job, ranging from working in a local vet’s office to a lumberyard, leaving the other alone as caregiver for the day.
Multiple advocacy groups, such as The Natural Child Project, Zero to Three, and the American Academy of Child and Adolescent Psychiatry, have issued statements calling for the removal of the show (follow the previous links to read them), on the grounds that separating babies and toddlers from their parents for three days is too traumatic and could damage healthy parent-child attachment. Furthermore, opponents of the show argue, parents who “loan” their children to “The Baby Borrowers” are not acting responsibly because they have no way of knowing whether their child’s teenage “parents” will be competent caregivers or not. (The “hit British program” was criticized for the same reasons, by the way.)
NBC has responded with this message board, on which some of the parents discuss their positive experiences with the show and entertain questions from curious viewers. One parent, Chet Nichols, describes the surprisingly lengthy and thorough-sounding evaluation process he and his family had to go through before their acceptance to the show:
“After making the decision to move forward, we were informed of the process of not only selecting the teens, but us (the actual parents) as well. We were informed that the teen couples, the parents and the children would have to all undergo a psychological evaluation, as well as a thorough background check. This included a very long, in depth psychological test, as well as the children having to go under psychological observation away from the parents. We were informed that all the houses would be professionally baby proofed, there would be a nanny watching the babies 24 hours a day who could only intervene if the safety and/or welfare of our children was being compromised, and that a psychologist would be watching what was going on as well. We were also informed that we could intervene at any time and remove our children at any time without any repercussions or breach of contract. Once we had a full disclosure of all the precautions that were put in place, we agreed to allow both of our youngest children, Etta age 6 months and Benjamin age 2 years old, to participate.”
Bill and Julie, who give no last name on the message board, feel that “people don’t actually care who we are, they just want to complain about us and judge without actually knowing who we are and why we participated. But the question keeps being asked without a real answer. Who would let someone “borrow” their baby?”
From what I read, the main goal of parents who submitted commentary to the NBC message board was to encourage would-be teen parents to think twice before having children; several of the “Baby Borrower” parents say they were teen parents themselves and want to warn others against making the same mistakes.
That’s all well and good, but it does seem ridiculous to me that the parents and NBC would willfully ignore and claim to know better than the experts on child development who have repeatedly raised concerns about the adverse effects “The Baby Borrowers” might be having on its youngest participants. It could certainly be worse — remember CBS’ slightly creepy “Kid Nation”? — but I’m still not comfortable with the way “The Baby Borrowers” works. As Zero to Three’s press statement points out, “Legitimate social experiments are not conducted on national television or on reality shows.”
I realize many of you have been discussing “The Baby Borrowers” already in the NeuroTalk communities, so, what do you think? If you have children, would you volunteer them for such a project? Are the concerns of such organizations as AACAP, Zero to Three, and the Natural Child Project valid? Or, as NBC and the participating parents would have us believe, are these professionals just big old wet blankets who don’t know a good teen birth control initiative when they see one?
(10 votes, average: 4.4 out of 5)
Loading ...This entry was posted on Thursday, July 10th, 2008 at 10:21 pm and is filed under General, Parenting, Anxiety and Panic, Children & Teens, Stress, Celebrities. You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed. You can leave a response, or trackback from your own site.
21 Responses to “Debate over NBC’s “The Baby Borrowers” Rages On” (Pingbacks/trackbacks not shown below)
I have blogged extensively about “The Baby Borrowers” (click my name for link). In the first episode, several of the babies showed what may have been signs of stress from separation, such as the baby who would not eat.
One of my two children was adopted at age seven months. During even the first few days, he showed very obvious signs of stress from being separated from his foster mother. I remember being heartbroken when he kept pulling away from his bottle to cry for her. In his case, this very painful separation was ultimately in his best interest, a case of the lesser of two evils, but in the case of the “borrowed” babies, nobody seems to be thinking of their best interest.
Ian Westmore at 7:08 pm on
July 11th, 2008
That’s all well and good, but it does seem ridiculous to me that the parents and NBC would willfully ignore and claim to know better than the experts on child development who have repeatedly raised concerns about the adverse effects “The Baby Borrowers” might be having on its youngest participants.
Perhaps so, but how is this any different to placing young children in day care? Millions of parents do that most days a week and you rarely hear an “expert” complaining.
Webster at 2:02 pm on
July 12th, 2008
Experts use to agree that the world was flat, but we all know how that turned out. It use to be beleived, by scientist and doctors, that if you reached up for something while pregnant that you would be tying the baby’s umbilical cord around the babies neck…now it is just an old wives tale. What about the effect of eggs on cholesterol? How man times has that changed? Scientific theories are always considered to be “works in progress.” No scientist worth his/her salt is ever going to say, “This is a FACT” to be carved in stone forever.
But what I would say is a fact, these parents know their children much better than these experts who have never seen them, at least no more than a few minutes on the TV screen.
But here is a fact for you…all babies cry. If they cry it does not always mean they are in distress, and if they are in distress, it does not mean it is from seperation. Sometimes it just means “hey dude, don’t lay me down” or “What you are eating looks good, I want to try it!”
Apparently people who bash te parents and NBC did not listen to what the one dad said. Heck, you do not get that type of preperation in daycares, nanny services and schools.
Give me a break!!!! Or better yet, give the parents a break for doing what they considered something for the greater good. Maybe you should take a look in the mirror and ask the person you see “What have you done to make this world a better place?”
Renée at 11:18 am on
July 14th, 2008
Hi, Ian,
Thanks for your comment — it’s certainly a valid criticism. My response would be that, when placing your children in daycare (assuming you’ve done your homework and found a quality program), you are placing them with people who are already know about early childhood development and who are trained in dealing with children. “The Baby Borrowers”, on the other hand, is placing children with people who have barely moved on from being children themselves, and who don’t possess any formal childcare training.
In the end, childcare decisions should of course be an arrangement parents are comfortable with and which will be most beneficial for their children. I would not personally feel comfortable with a “Baby Borrowers”-esque childcare setup if I had a son or daughter, but perhaps other parents would. The most important thing is to consider how the decisions you are making will impact your child, and whether they contribute to optimal development.
Cheers,
Renée
Tamra at 6:39 pm on
July 14th, 2008
I’m really relieved that the American Academy of Child and Adolescent Psychiatry are stepping in to remove the show from the air and support the rights of the children. If the parents aren’t concerned enough with the psychological development of their children or aren’t aware of the problems that can arise, then someone has to be. Negligence has certainly been witnessed on the show and I can almost be certain it has off the air as well.
No child’s emotional, mental, or physical well-being should be compromised for the entertainment of the world.
hi,
Am I the only one who is snorting whenever one of these teenagers on The Baby Borrowers starts bitching or crying about how hard it is to do what they’re doing?
The Country Shrink at 11:19 am on
July 16th, 2008
I agree that it is a bad idea to be doing this sort of thing with infants. It may be that they will not be harmed by the separation, but I don’t think it should be risked. I have worked with numerous people in my practice who experienced an early separation resulting in attachment problems, depression, etc… Whether 3 days is long enough to cause this, I don’t know, but it’s not worth the risk for entertainment.
Barack Like Me at 2:36 pm on
July 16th, 2008
For Ginkgo 100, trying to analyze a baby’s psychological state from watching an **edited** television program is foolish and amateurish. You have no way of knowing what led into the episode, what occurred after, or any of the other interventions the producers may have decided not to show.
I have no statistics, but I am tempted to say that assuming most children in day care are tended by experienced and knowledgeable child development experts is an extremely middle-class blindered view. Based anecdotally on what I see around me in a mixed (in all respects) neighborhood of Chicago, I suspect many if not most babies and toddlers are cared for either by underpaid and undertrained childcare center workers, or by a neighborhood grandma offering home care.
Gianna at 8:10 pm on
July 16th, 2008
I’m neutral on whether this is a good or bad idea but I see no difference between this and parents who leave their children with nannies…hundreds of thousands of parents, I’m quite sure have left their young children with nannies for 3 days…
BarackLikeMe,
That is why I carefully described it as “what may have been signs of stress from separation” with emphasis on the “may.” I am very aware that there is often very little reality shown on reality TV shows.
The differences between day care and “The Baby Borrowers” are these: First, day care lasts a matter of hours, not days; and second, day care is done with the best interests of the family (which includes the child herself) in mind, not for “entertainment” or “education” of unrelated teenagers.
lizzy at 12:27 am on
July 17th, 2008
Seriously? it only 3 days. i don’t see what damage it could do. what happens when parents go on vacation and leave their child with someone. the kids are not in danger. The children’s parents a only seconds away and a “professional” nanny is there at all times. i don’t see how thats any different from day care. In fact its better, i don’t know what day cares you “experts” use but where i live the day care workers start as young as 16 like every other job and have no training what so ever. Im the same age as some of the “borrowers” and considering that the teen pregnancy rate continues to rise and the recent pact made by a group of teen girls to all have babies, i think this is a great way to show teens that maybe its not as easy as they think, not to mention the fact these are not your children. If the parents think its ok, then who are you to say its not? they know their kids and if they want to keep teen from making the same mistake they did than more power to them. I think its great!
Anne at 11:34 pm on
July 17th, 2008
Sounds to me like the children are closely supervised, and, if the parents are only steps away and are free to stop the “experiment” at any time, what’s the harm? I don’t see how a three day separation under these conditions would be damaging at all– infants and children must learn to separate from their parents to develop independence and so they can form attachments to others. I haven’t seen the show. Apparently it’s entertaining; I imagine it’s educational as well. I hope young people are watching and will come to really understand the tremendous challenges of teen-parenthood, which is decidedly NOT in the best interest of children.
Lil Gluckstern, M. F. T. at 2:05 pm on
July 18th, 2008
What is appalling to me is that the children are separated from their parents for three days which is a long time for children, and put in the hands of inexperienced kids, not nannies. All for a television show. Children are not commodities, nor are they just little people. Separation is an issue; experiencing the anxiety, and confusion of these caretakers is harmful. Children are like little radio antennas. They pick up on everything! And they are being exploited. Very distasteful!
Gianna at 11:51 pm on
July 18th, 2008
what is appalling to me is most of affluent America treats their children like this everyday leaving kids with strangers…it’s not different…and in this case the parents can watch over the children–much less appalling.
then there are all the poor families and/or single women who are given no support and forced to work multiple jobs and have even lower quality of day care…
what is happening in this show is minor compared to what is happening across america everyday…
we should be appalled at parents who choose professional care over caring for their own children when they have a choice. Yes children need their parents, but this is three days…not a whole childhood spent more often in daycare or vacations with nannies.
Indeed at 10:30 am on
July 19th, 2008
For those professionals of mental health who are opposed to the show, can you explain in more detail what causes the emotional distress, and what the repercussions are? For example, how long can an infant be away from the parent before detrimental effects take place (a ballpark figure at least) and what exactly are the emotional/developmental ramifications? Those opposed to the show appear to have some science to back up their opinions, so I’d like to hear them. As for me, I don’t care for any reality tv show- they are bad news.
Gianna at 9:28 am on
July 20th, 2008
I’m with you indeed…reality shows suck…
Jeremy Lankford at 1:35 pm on
July 24th, 2008
The teenage “parents” may gain some great insight on how difficult it is to raise a child. It also may create some fears in teenagers watching the show and create a greater since of responsibility.
On the other hand, the organizations calling for removal are completely correct. The separation from the “real” parents could become very traumatic and have a long lasting impact on the parent-child relationship in the future.
The negative impacts on the “real” parent’s relationship with their children far out weigh the need of teaching teens “reality”. However, we all know the lesson learned here is not about moral implications. It all comes down to money. It truly amazes me what parents will do in order to gain stardom for their children and/or themselves.
Carol at 4:54 pm on
July 25th, 2008
One does not need a degree in clinical psychology to recognize that rigid bodies, frantic searching eyes, averted gazes, uncontrollable crying, and spontaneous vomiting are signs of severe emotional turmoil. I can only imagine how heart-wrenching it must have been for those parents to sit and watch their children in obvious distress. Perhaps they were comforted by the notion that their participation in this “social experiment” would make a difference. After all, that is the whole point of “The Baby Borrowers” is it not? The show purports to discourage teen pregnancy by enlightening young people on the realities of parenthood. I hate to be the bearer of bad news, but, if the comments posted on the NBC website, facebook, and other blogs are any indication, the teenagers watching the show are not being dissuaded by what they see. They are, in fact, rooting for their favorite couples. One writes, “i love you alicea and cory yall make a really good parents!!!!:)” So much for the slogan, “It’s not TV. It’s birth control!” If one is so naive as to believe that the executives at NBC are interested in anything more than ratings, then it is time for a reality check.
Be a Part of the Conversation! Comment on this Entry Now:
I have blogged extensively about “The Baby Borrowers” (click my name for link). In the first episode, several of the babies showed what may have been signs of stress from separation, such as the baby who would not eat.
One of my two children was adopted at age seven months. During even the first few days, he showed very obvious signs of stress from being separated from his foster mother. I remember being heartbroken when he kept pulling away from his bottle to cry for her. In his case, this very painful separation was ultimately in his best interest, a case of the lesser of two evils, but in the case of the “borrowed” babies, nobody seems to be thinking of their best interest.
That’s all well and good, but it does seem ridiculous to me that the parents and NBC would willfully ignore and claim to know better than the experts on child development who have repeatedly raised concerns about the adverse effects “The Baby Borrowers” might be having on its youngest participants.
Perhaps so, but how is this any different to placing young children in day care? Millions of parents do that most days a week and you rarely hear an “expert” complaining.
Experts use to agree that the world was flat, but we all know how that turned out. It use to be beleived, by scientist and doctors, that if you reached up for something while pregnant that you would be tying the baby’s umbilical cord around the babies neck…now it is just an old wives tale. What about the effect of eggs on cholesterol? How man times has that changed? Scientific theories are always considered to be “works in progress.” No scientist worth his/her salt is ever going to say, “This is a FACT” to be carved in stone forever.
But what I would say is a fact, these parents know their children much better than these experts who have never seen them, at least no more than a few minutes on the TV screen.
But here is a fact for you…all babies cry. If they cry it does not always mean they are in distress, and if they are in distress, it does not mean it is from seperation. Sometimes it just means “hey dude, don’t lay me down” or “What you are eating looks good, I want to try it!”
Apparently people who bash te parents and NBC did not listen to what the one dad said. Heck, you do not get that type of preperation in daycares, nanny services and schools.
Give me a break!!!! Or better yet, give the parents a break for doing what they considered something for the greater good. Maybe you should take a look in the mirror and ask the person you see “What have you done to make this world a better place?”
Hi, Ian,
Thanks for your comment — it’s certainly a valid criticism. My response would be that, when placing your children in daycare (assuming you’ve done your homework and found a quality program), you are placing them with people who are already know about early childhood development and who are trained in dealing with children. “The Baby Borrowers”, on the other hand, is placing children with people who have barely moved on from being children themselves, and who don’t possess any formal childcare training.
In the end, childcare decisions should of course be an arrangement parents are comfortable with and which will be most beneficial for their children. I would not personally feel comfortable with a “Baby Borrowers”-esque childcare setup if I had a son or daughter, but perhaps other parents would. The most important thing is to consider how the decisions you are making will impact your child, and whether they contribute to optimal development.
Cheers,
Renée
I’m really relieved that the American Academy of Child and Adolescent Psychiatry are stepping in to remove the show from the air and support the rights of the children. If the parents aren’t concerned enough with the psychological development of their children or aren’t aware of the problems that can arise, then someone has to be. Negligence has certainly been witnessed on the show and I can almost be certain it has off the air as well.
No child’s emotional, mental, or physical well-being should be compromised for the entertainment of the world.
hi,
Am I the only one who is snorting whenever one of these teenagers on The Baby Borrowers starts bitching or crying about how hard it is to do what they’re doing?
I agree that it is a bad idea to be doing this sort of thing with infants. It may be that they will not be harmed by the separation, but I don’t think it should be risked. I have worked with numerous people in my practice who experienced an early separation resulting in attachment problems, depression, etc… Whether 3 days is long enough to cause this, I don’t know, but it’s not worth the risk for entertainment.
For Ginkgo 100, trying to analyze a baby’s psychological state from watching an **edited** television program is foolish and amateurish. You have no way of knowing what led into the episode, what occurred after, or any of the other interventions the producers may have decided not to show.
I have no statistics, but I am tempted to say that assuming most children in day care are tended by experienced and knowledgeable child development experts is an extremely middle-class blindered view. Based anecdotally on what I see around me in a mixed (in all respects) neighborhood of Chicago, I suspect many if not most babies and toddlers are cared for either by underpaid and undertrained childcare center workers, or by a neighborhood grandma offering home care.
I’m neutral on whether this is a good or bad idea but I see no difference between this and parents who leave their children with nannies…hundreds of thousands of parents, I’m quite sure have left their young children with nannies for 3 days…
BarackLikeMe,
That is why I carefully described it as “what may have been signs of stress from separation” with emphasis on the “may.” I am very aware that there is often very little reality shown on reality TV shows.
The differences between day care and “The Baby Borrowers” are these: First, day care lasts a matter of hours, not days; and second, day care is done with the best interests of the family (which includes the child herself) in mind, not for “entertainment” or “education” of unrelated teenagers.
Seriously? it only 3 days. i don’t see what damage it could do. what happens when parents go on vacation and leave their child with someone. the kids are not in danger. The children’s parents a only seconds away and a “professional” nanny is there at all times. i don’t see how thats any different from day care. In fact its better, i don’t know what day cares you “experts” use but where i live the day care workers start as young as 16 like every other job and have no training what so ever. Im the same age as some of the “borrowers” and considering that the teen pregnancy rate continues to rise and the recent pact made by a group of teen girls to all have babies, i think this is a great way to show teens that maybe its not as easy as they think, not to mention the fact these are not your children. If the parents think its ok, then who are you to say its not? they know their kids and if they want to keep teen from making the same mistake they did than more power to them. I think its great!
Sounds to me like the children are closely supervised, and, if the parents are only steps away and are free to stop the “experiment” at any time, what’s the harm? I don’t see how a three day separation under these conditions would be damaging at all– infants and children must learn to separate from their parents to develop independence and so they can form attachments to others. I haven’t seen the show. Apparently it’s entertaining; I imagine it’s educational as well. I hope young people are watching and will come to really understand the tremendous challenges of teen-parenthood, which is decidedly NOT in the best interest of children.
What is appalling to me is that the children are separated from their parents for three days which is a long time for children, and put in the hands of inexperienced kids, not nannies. All for a television show. Children are not commodities, nor are they just little people. Separation is an issue; experiencing the anxiety, and confusion of these caretakers is harmful. Children are like little radio antennas. They pick up on everything! And they are being exploited. Very distasteful!
what is appalling to me is most of affluent America treats their children like this everyday leaving kids with strangers…it’s not different…and in this case the parents can watch over the children–much less appalling.
then there are all the poor families and/or single women who are given no support and forced to work multiple jobs and have even lower quality of day care…
what is happening in this show is minor compared to what is happening across america everyday…
we should be appalled at parents who choose professional care over caring for their own children when they have a choice. Yes children need their parents, but this is three days…not a whole childhood spent more often in daycare or vacations with nannies.
For those professionals of mental health who are opposed to the show, can you explain in more detail what causes the emotional distress, and what the repercussions are? For example, how long can an infant be away from the parent before detrimental effects take place (a ballpark figure at least) and what exactly are the emotional/developmental ramifications? Those opposed to the show appear to have some science to back up their opinions, so I’d like to hear them. As for me, I don’t care for any reality tv show- they are bad news.
I’m with you indeed…reality shows suck…
The teenage “parents” may gain some great insight on how difficult it is to raise a child. It also may create some fears in teenagers watching the show and create a greater since of responsibility.
On the other hand, the organizations calling for removal are completely correct. The separation from the “real” parents could become very traumatic and have a long lasting impact on the parent-child relationship in the future.
The negative impacts on the “real” parent’s relationship with their children far out weigh the need of teaching teens “reality”. However, we all know the lesson learned here is not about moral implications. It all comes down to money. It truly amazes me what parents will do in order to gain stardom for their children and/or themselves.
One does not need a degree in clinical psychology to recognize that rigid bodies, frantic searching eyes, averted gazes, uncontrollable crying, and spontaneous vomiting are signs of severe emotional turmoil. I can only imagine how heart-wrenching it must have been for those parents to sit and watch their children in obvious distress. Perhaps they were comforted by the notion that their participation in this “social experiment” would make a difference. After all, that is the whole point of “The Baby Borrowers” is it not? The show purports to discourage teen pregnancy by enlightening young people on the realities of parenthood. I hate to be the bearer of bad news, but, if the comments posted on the NBC website, facebook, and other blogs are any indication, the teenagers watching the show are not being dissuaded by what they see. They are, in fact, rooting for their favorite couples. One writes, “i love you alicea and cory yall make a really good parents!!!!:)” So much for the slogan, “It’s not TV. It’s birth control!” If one is so naive as to believe that the executives at NBC are interested in anything more than ratings, then it is time for a reality check.
